Suppr超能文献

农村阿巴拉契亚地区患者对癌症临床试验决策中随机化和不确定性的理解

Comprehension of Randomization and Uncertainty in Cancer Clinical Trials Decision Making Among Rural, Appalachian Patients.

作者信息

Krieger Janice L, Palmer-Wackerly Angela, Dailey Phokeng M, Krok-Schoen Jessica L, Schoenberg Nancy E, Paskett Electra D

机构信息

College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.

STEM Translational Communication Research Program, College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA.

出版信息

J Cancer Educ. 2015 Dec;30(4):743-8. doi: 10.1007/s13187-015-0789-0.

Abstract

Comprehension of randomization is a vital, but understudied, component of informed consent to participate in cancer randomized clinical trials (RCTs). This study examines patient comprehension of the randomization process as well as sources of ongoing uncertainty that may inhibit a patient's ability to provide informed consent to participate in RCTs. Cancer patients living in rural Appalachia who were offered an opportunity to participate in a cancer treatment RCT completed in-depth interviews and a brief survey. No systematic differences in randomization comprehension between patients who consented and those who declined participation in a cancer RCT were detected. Comprehension is conceptually distinct from uncertainty, with patients who had both high and low comprehension experiencing randomization-related uncertainty. Uncertainty about randomization was found to have cognitive and affective dimensions. Not all patients enrolling in RCTs have a sufficient understanding of the randomization process to provide informed consent. Healthcare providers need to be aware of the different types of randomization-related uncertainty. Efforts to improve informed consent to participate in RCTs should focus on having patients teach back their understanding of randomization. This practice could yield valuable information about the patient's cognitive and affective understanding of randomization as well as opportunities to correct misperceptions. Education about RCTs should reflect patient expectations of individualized care by explaining how all treatments being compared are appropriate to the specifics of a patient's disease.

摘要

对随机分组的理解是参与癌症随机临床试验(RCT)知情同意的一个至关重要但研究不足的组成部分。本研究考察了患者对随机分组过程的理解以及可能阻碍患者提供参与RCT知情同意能力的持续不确定性来源。居住在阿巴拉契亚农村地区、有机会参与癌症治疗RCT的癌症患者完成了深入访谈和简短调查。未发现同意参与和拒绝参与癌症RCT的患者在随机分组理解上存在系统差异。理解在概念上与不确定性不同,理解程度高和低的患者都经历了与随机分组相关的不确定性。发现随机分组的不确定性具有认知和情感维度。并非所有参与RCT的患者都对随机分组过程有足够的理解以提供知情同意。医疗保健提供者需要意识到与随机分组相关的不同类型的不确定性。提高参与RCT知情同意的努力应侧重于让患者反馈他们对随机分组的理解。这种做法可以产生有关患者对随机分组的认知和情感理解的有价值信息,以及纠正误解的机会。关于RCT的教育应通过解释所有被比较的治疗方法如何适合患者疾病的具体情况来反映患者对个性化护理的期望。

相似文献

2
Must research participants understand randomization?
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Feb;9(2):3-8. doi: 10.1080/15265160802654145.
3
The effectiveness of health literacy interventions on the informed consent process of health care users: a systematic review protocol.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):82-94. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2304.
6
Linguistic Strategies for Improving Informed Consent in Clinical Trials Among Low Health Literacy Patients.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016 Oct 28;109(3). doi: 10.1093/jnci/djw233. Print 2017 Mar.
7
Randomization and the transactional framework for informed consent.
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Feb;9(2):16-7. doi: 10.1080/15265160802666297.
8
Understanding randomization: helpful strategies.
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Feb;9(2):14-5. doi: 10.1080/15265160802663245.
9
Lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials.
Health Technol Assess. 2005 Mar;9(8):1-192, iii-iv. doi: 10.3310/hta9080.
10
Randomization can be risky.
Am J Bioeth. 2009 Feb;9(2):17-8. doi: 10.1080/15265160802668954.

引用本文的文献

4
Untangling interactivity's effects: The role of cognitive absorption, perceived visual informativeness, and cancer information overload.
Patient Educ Couns. 2021 May;104(5):1059-1065. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.007. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
5
Stakeholder involvement in the development of trial material for a clinical trial.
Health Expect. 2021 Apr;24(2):399-410. doi: 10.1111/hex.13181. Epub 2020 Dec 14.
6
Deciding to Enrol in a Cancer Trial: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.
J Multidiscip Healthc. 2020 Oct 27;13:1257-1281. doi: 10.2147/JMDH.S266281. eCollection 2020.
8
What Motivates You to Share? The Effect of Interactive Tailored Information Aids on Information Sharing about Clinical Trials.
Health Commun. 2021 Oct;36(11):1388-1396. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1754588. Epub 2020 Apr 28.
9
Ready to Make A Decision: A Model of Informational Aids to Improve Informed Participation in Clinical Trial Research.
J Health Commun. 2019;24(12):865-877. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2019.1680773. Epub 2019 Oct 30.
10
Assessing informed consent in an opioid relapse prevention study with adults under current or recent criminal justice supervision.
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2017 Oct;81:66-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2017.07.015. Epub 2017 Aug 1.

本文引用的文献

4
United Kingdom becomes the cancer clinical trials recruitment capital of the world.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007 Mar 21;99(6):420-2. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djk140.
5
The many meanings of uncertainty in illness: toward a systematic accounting.
Health Commun. 1998;10(1):1-23. doi: 10.1207/s15327027hc1001_1.
7
Seeking informed consent to cancer clinical trials: describing current practice.
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Jun;58(12):2445-57. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.09.007.
8
Randomisation in trials: do potential trial participants understand it and find it acceptable?
J Med Ethics. 2004 Feb;30(1):80-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2002.001123.
9
Cancer diagnosis and prognosis in Taiwan: patient preferences versus experiences.
Psychooncology. 2004 Jan;13(1):1-13. doi: 10.1002/pon.721.
10
Can a brief video intervention improve breast cancer clinical trial knowledge and beliefs?
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Jan;58(1):193-205. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(03)00162-x.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验